After watching too many street performers at the Edinburgh Festival, I finally got to see Dolly! Here I am with Dolly, at the Edinburgh Museum.
Visiting Dolly made me think of the controversy that surrounded her.
Within the scientific community, there was a concern about the viability of cloning both in sheep and humans due to the following:
· The scientists who created Dolly admitted that there were numerous failed attempts to produce viable offspring using the technique. There were reports that cloned lambs produced were abnormally large and died shortly after birth.
· Dolly died prematurely at the age of six after suffering from arthritis and progressive lung disease.
· Dolly’s DNA was found to have shortened telomeres indicating premature ageing. Doubts about the viability of clones beyond the age of their donor were raised because the donor cells came from a six year old sheep.
But it was Dolly’s very creation and existence that sparked controversy both internally and externally to the scientific community. Some of the arguments against cloning were:
· The cloning of humans was unacceptable as it was in effect “playing god” with human life.
· Life is intrinsically valuable. To clone a human would not preserve human dignity and respect the creation of life the way “nature” intended.
· Concern for the welfare of the child who has been cloned.
I’m going to explore the arguments against cloning more fully in the next few blogs. I want to know whether these arguments are legitimate or not? So it’s goodbye to Dolly for now, but I have to say, it’s been fun!
Sources
Harris, J. “Goodbye Dolly?” The ethics of human cloning. Journal of Medical Ethics 1997; 23 353-360.
Petersen, A. Replicating our bodies, losing ourselves: News media portrayals of human cloning in the wake of Dolly. Body and Society, 2002; 8(4), 71-90.
Burley, J & Harris. J Human cloning and child welfare. Journal of Medical Ethics, 1999 25(2), 108-113.
Burley, J. The ethics of therapeutic and reproductive human cloning. Cell and Developmental Biology, 1999, 10, 287-294.
No comments:
Post a Comment